Sexe Oral - Féminisme & élections fédérales 2025 avec Antonine Yaccarini

Episode Date: April 17, 2025

Les propos exprimés dans ce podcast relèvent d’expériences et d’opinions personnelles dans un but de divertissement et ne substituent pas les conseils d’un.e sexologue ou autre professionnel de la santé. Cette semaine sur le podcast, on reçoit la chroniqueuse et analyste politique Antonine Yaccarini pour une discussion autour des enjeux importants liés aux élections fédérales qui ont lieux présentement. On aborde les thèmes de l'inclusion, du droit des femmes et membres de la communauté LGBTQ2S+ et on dresse un portrait des différents partis politiques.Ressources:Pour trouver sa circonscription : https://www.elections.ca/scripts/vis/FindED?L=f&PAGEID=20Canada 338 (pour savoir les projections dans les circonscriptions) : https://338canada.com/districts.htmLa boussole électorale : https://boussole.radio-canada.ca/Pour faire un vote pro-choix : https://fqpn.qc.ca/article/elections-2025/Lambert Drainville qui fait des capsules politiques : @Lambertt__ sur TikTok et sur Instagram Pour suivre Antonine:https://www.tiktok.com/@antoyac_yachttps://www.instagram.com/antoyaccarini/ Le podcast est présenté par Éros et Compagnie Utiliser le code promo : SexeOral pour 15% de rabais https://www.erosetcompagnie.com/ Les jouets dont les filles parlent: https://www.erosetcompagnie.com/page/podcast  Le podcast est présenté par Oxio. Pour plus d'informations: https://oxio.ca/ Code promo pour essayer Oxio gratuitement pendant un mois: SEXEORAL ---- Pour collaborations: [e-mail] Pour toutes questions: [e-mail] Pour suivre les filles sur Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/sexeoralpodcast Pour contacter les filles directement, écrivez-nous sur Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/sexeoral.podcast/

You can listen to Sex Orale one week in advance and without advertising on Amazon Music. It's available with your Amazon Prime subscription. Today's podcast is presented by Heros & Company. And I'm announcing to you today and to you too, Liz, that our elite toy, I want to say, the most popular toy in our range, which one is it? I don't know, which one is the most popular toy in our class. Which one is it? I don't know which one is the most popular. There's the word 7 in it. 7?

Yes, in the seventh heaven. It's our most popular, I didn't know. It's really ours. I'll tell you. It was B.O. People were waiting for it. Oh, it's back! So here, the two most popular technologies together, we have tapas at the vaginal level, so... Check that!

Check that! It gives the feeling of stopping talking about Eros and Alice Chris and that in the noon. Obviously, that's the purpose of advertising. It's really to stop listening to the podcast, to Alice putting that in the cloud and to start the podcast again after. So, you can get it. I think there's... Excuse me. Go ahead. If there's one thing you should be influenced by us, that's it. Once, let's say you say, I'm going to wait for the shot that I'm going to be influenced by, for example, Joanie, I don't know when it's going to be, I think it should

be there. Yeah, that's the first time. If you never say let's influence, it's going to be the first time. I think it should be there. You're going to be sure your own in your mouth. Your mouth. Yeah. And you can get it on www.héroessecompagnie.com in the section sexual and the promo code to get 15% is the sexual code 15% of online rabies only.

Today on the podcast, we have Antonine. Antonine, who is a political analyst in the field for more than ten years, she came to talk to us today about federal elections in a more feminist perspective, obviously, talking about women, about how they situate themselves in all of this. And also LGBTQ communities. We really have a flower in everything. It gives us a kind of survole on political parties, a little bit about why it's important to vote, what are the strengths and weaknesses of each party. So it helps to get a head start in terms of elections. And then there will be plenty of tools and resources in the description to know where you are in all of this. So it was such an interesting discussion, so relevant, fun and popularized.

It's not hard to understand. Joannie and I felt confident with her, and we weren't afraid to ask her any questions or feel that it was a bad perception. It's been two days since I last slept, and I've gone from, I know 0% of the elections, to, I want to leave a party, the electoral and very strong and very powerful. So wait and watch that.

You'll see maybe it will come out next year. Who knows? If you want to vote for us, encourage us in the comments. Oh, 2026, provincial, sexual party. One day, I learned that one day, I'm going to support our Paris Gang. We're ready. Let's go. Good podcast, L'Aguain.

Good podcast. Enjoy. Today's go! Let's go! Good podcast, L'Aiguille. Good podcast. Enjoy! Today's podcast is presented by Oxio, the independent internet provider with whom it clicks. These are fair and sustainable prices all year round. There is no price increase at Oxio. The price you sign at the start is the one you will have. You can say bye to endless negotiations, to the period of dishonest promotion, to

the Rabaic and Expire. you know right away where you're going. You can be calm with a bill that stays the same with auction every month. So no long-term contracts, I'm sorry. Guaranteed, yes, there is no long-term contract. There is a 60-day warranty for satisfaction. So if you don't like that, if you're a kid, I'm not crazy, there's no problem. 60 days, it's okay. 60 days is a lot. And you have the oral sex code that will give you the first month for free

with the oral sex code on oxio.ca So I'm going to try to see if you have a good time with you as much as with us. Thank you! Today on the podcast, we have Antonine Yakary. Hello! Thank you so much for being here. Before we dive into the subject, could you tell us a little bit about yourself? What do you do? Why are you here today? What are we invited to do today?

First of all, it's a great privilege to be invited here. I'm really, really happy to be here today with you two. So I'm a political analyst. I've worked on the Parliament Hill for about ten years in Quebec. I've worked for various elected officials, ministers, opposition leaders, and various deputies. Then, after my political career, I decided to... In fact, politics is a bit of a drug, to be honest.

And it's hard to get out of politics. After all, we all seem a bit flat, and our jobs seem flat. So, the political chronicle, doing political analysis in the media, it's a bit like my methadone, which helps me not to reject and not to return to politics. So what I do is that I work in different media, where I try to explain a little bit the opposite of the set to people. Going a little bit further than the big titles, you know, sometimes we look at politics, it looks like it's chicanes, bribes, partisanship that we see that appears in the media. But in the air of that, the the the

the the the the the the the I never really knew about it, so why would I listen to this? There's like a... I don't know, there's a syndrome of impostors that suddenly comes to inform you when you haven't done it for years.

It can be intimidating. And honestly, there are a lot of people who talk about it. They want to ask me questions, but at the same time, they're even afraid that their question is nonsensical. And there's no nonsensical question. In fact, politics belongs to everyone. We are in a democracy. And your opinion and your vote are worth as much as mine, in fact. And then... That's worrying.

It can be worrying. We're going to take a little path together today in relation to all this. I would say that... I notice that if your parents didn't initiate you to do this, unless you're really, I call it a little flower that grows on the asphalt, it's quite rare that young people will really be interested in this. I don't know if your family was politically wise around the table, but I don't have any merit in any way, because my father's family, Europeans, political agencies at the table...

At home, my grandfather would ask us questions like, you're 7 and a half, and it's like, what do you think of the situation in Palestine? And there's no one laughing at you with your answers, and it's okay, and we make mistakes, and we move forward like that in our discussions. And in the family of my mother, who is more of a Quebecois Purlaine family of Saguenay origin, it was also about politics, not necessarily at the same level, not necessarily international politics, more local politics. So I've been aware of that since I was young. Even when I was a teenager, I rejected that a little, I didn't want to. And finally, it caught me from my majority.

So basically, if your parents didn't initiate all of this, it won't interest you. The other thing is that it's a bit normal that politics doesn't interest a 20-year-old young person. You don't pay a lot of taxes. Your priorities are to travel, to find a man, a blonde, who suits you, and you can go out, etc. You can also find a student, but it's not... You don't give half of your salary to the government, basically. So, at some point, as you grow older, you try to find a place to live.

You say, well, yes, the housing, how did it become so expensive? What has the government done with that? After that, maybe you'll have a child. Then you have maternity leave. You can compare and say, hey, it's interesting, maternity leave in Quebec. What's the story behind all this? When you look at the United States, women have two months of leave. They go back to work, put their baby, very small, at a babysitter.

Then you'll wait to have a place in the nursery. Then you say, you're old enough to give a third of your salary to the government. You say, I give a third of my salary to the government, and I don't have a place in the nursery. What is this lottery? I have to bribe the nursery owners to find me a place. Then you get old like that.

And then you have the trouble of buying a house. You say, Caroline, how come we can't afford to buy a house in Montreal, for example, to raise my children? Your parents get old. Suddenly, your parents are less healthy. Then you get into the health system. Maybe you yourself will also experience a situation in the health system. You try to have an appointment for your 2-year-old child in a clinic, it's a crossroads. As you age, these questions arise more than when you are 20 years old.

And we see it in the participation rates, the young people will not vote. So what it does, it's a vicious circle. It's that, basically, the electorate is old. You want to seduce an electorate who will get up from his or her house, go to the voting office and put the paper in the moon. So you're going to make proposals, promises, and then policies that are aimed at older people. So, in the end, it doesn't interest the young people,

and the service continues like that. I still feel that, with everything that's happening in the end, it doesn't interest the young people, and the service continues like that. I feel that with everything that's happening in the United States, there's really a rise in global interest. Sometimes, just a kind of shock like that, you're like, okay, it's more than... Sometimes, we don't realize it, and big shocks like that, I feel like it's still moving things around me. You'll tell me, well, you're not in your twenties, I understand, but I still see a difference. I feel it too. I really have friends who are not very interested in politics, who ask me a lot of questions right now. In taxi drivers, I went to a cafe,

people are talking a lot more about politics right now. Trump's return to the United States is giving me a shock. And you know, the economy wasn't doing very well. Already, since the Covid pandemic, things were expensive too. It directly affects people. Even if you decide to do the other way around and you're not interested in politics,

well, inflation will still affect you. The cost of living, the cost of houses, these are all elements that will affect you. And then we have Trump who comes back to the United States, and who has an economic policy that risks increasing prices even more in the coming years, if we feel it. After, there were Trump's threats

to annex Canada. This also woke up as a part of the population who generally may be less interested in this. And we aroused a part of the population that is generally less interested in that. We also have a phenomenon in our society right now, I call it the two bubbles. It's like a bubble plus the Baby Boomer generation, Generation X, who still listens to television, traditional media, who basically opens the TV and listens to a bulletin with politics, the judiciary, the sport. My mother, that's how she used to watch TV.

Then there are the other younger generations where we are subscribed to online platforms, we choose our content and we are pushed by the algorithm, which we already like. So there is this problem that exists at the moment. But international politics and Trump, We already like that. So there is this problem that exists at the moment. But international politics and Trump, it's as if it managed to penetrate the other bubble, the one that doesn't necessarily listen to what's happening in politics. And we feel that a lot in this election. We are in a federal election at the moment.

And I see that the bubbles have come together a little bit at the moment. Why is it important to vote? Well, first of all, it's that the position of the empty chair, if you think politics is imperfect, you look at the choices you have on the ballot, and you say, well, nothing suits me perfectly. It's normal. Politics is only compromises. A political party will represent a lot, a lot, a lot of people.

So it will never be 100% what you want. But if you don't vote and you don't demand anything, the chances that it will look like you are even less. In fact, it will be zero. And that's really what I see right now with the younger people. Political parties will want to make a few proposals just to say, we are interested in young people. But it's not true that the policies that are made and the electoral promises that are made are addressed to our generations. And it's always difficult to mobilize people to each put a little grain of sand.

We don't have the impression of having a big impact. And I think that when you're younger, you have the impression that, for example, you're involved in a cause, doing volunteer work. You see the impact of what you do right away. But to put a brick in between lots of other bricks, you don't feel like you have that much weight. It doesn't give you the instant reward you're used to. You can order food, it takes three minutes.

If a TikTok didn't hook us in the first two seconds. We think about something else. We have an abundance of content. Politics is slower, it's compromises. It's not exactly what you like, what you want. And I think that for that, the only thing we can do to change things is to be interested in it and to get involved. Even if it's hard sometimes. And the difference, let's say, between the importance of voting in the provincial or the federal?

Well, right now we're in a federal election. You have to know that the federal issues are even further away from the reality of citizens. So, in fact, in Canada, we have provinces and we have the federal government. The federal government takes care of things that are less in the daily life, like the post. We had strikes last year and it still affected a lot of people. The army, immigration, the protection of our borders, for example. Still important issues are also raised, especially with all kinds of migratory flows, immigrants who come to Canada, and with Trump, it could be even more the case.

But the federal does not take care of health, education, care, which are the issues that often affect us the most on a daily basis and which we talk about the most. In general, I do political analysis regularly. We talk about provincial policy, I would say 75% of the time, and federal 25% of the time. But there, with Trump's Trump to the United States, it's really federal politics that is very, very concerned. And it should also be said that Justin Trudeau's government, in the last ten years,

was still doing a lot of politics in the powers of the provinces, so in health, in education. There is a dental care program that has launched for people who have a lower income. The federal grants dental care. We know it's very expensive to go to the dentist. And there are several families, which is the first thing they will cut in the end, for their children in particular. There was also a national program for care. In Quebec, we were very avant-garde. We had an extraordinary network ofils, but not with places for everyone, the kind of Cadillac that you win at the lottery. But in the other provinces, there wasn't necessarily that.

So the federal took the initiative to make a program in the rest of Canada. And in Quebec, we were compensated, we were given the money for the program, since we already had our guardrails program. So there is a tendency, even now, for the federal government, to have issues that affect people a little more. Sometimes it makes a mess with the provinces. But at the moment, the main issue of this election campaign is the economy and our relations with the United States. And the famous, let's say, I just want to say, by the way, I don't talk much about this podcast because I don't really know much about it.

Politics started to interest me this year, from Trump to all the feminist movements, anti-abortion, all that. So that's when I realized the impact of the government, that oh my god, c'est important. Mettons en tant que femme féministe, c'est quoi les parties qui connaissent pas dans la... Tout ça. Je sais que Le Poliev, on l'aime pas. Monsieur Liev, je le veux pas dans ma vie. Fait que lui, c'est sûr qu'il est out. Puis parce que justement, il y a un disco très anti-work, anti-féministe, anti-toutes, là. Toutes très de droite. Oui, c'est ça qu'on appelle. Absolument. C'est ça qu'on appelle. There's a disco that's anti-work, anti-feminist, anti-all, all very right-wing. Yes, that's what we call it.

Absolutely. That's what we call it. Everything you say is rigorously true. Good, I'm not surprised. So how, with who can I... I'm very... I love plants, I love nature. So, Parti Vert interests me a lot. But then I was told that it's like canceling your vote. But if, let's say, we all say that we vote for Parti vert, is there a chance?

Let's say we're doing a little overview of all the parties in the election right now. Let's do a little overview. First, I just want to tell you that your vote for Parti vert is not a lost vote. I don't believe in that in life. It always depends on your priorities. If, for example, your absolute priority is to block conservatives, you could say, well, I'm going to look in my account to vote strategically. But if you want to vote for values that are interrupting you, I respect that 100% and I'm even going to reveal something, I don't say it often, I've already been a candidate for the party when I was very young.

After that, as I got older, I became very young, after that, when I was growing up, I became more pragmatic and I changed my focus a little bit, but I'm not the one who's going to judge the votes for the fair part at all. She has stars in her eyes. Ah, that's nice. That's what she said, if you want to vote strategically. Let's say that my love for plants is super strong, but that my love for LGBT rights, women, etc. I pay more than I love plants, I think. In Quebec, the winter break is not very strong. So it will have a less big impact on the overall result of the election. I don't want you to give your address in order, but according to your circumscription,

and I invite people to do the same, there is a website called Quebec 125 Canada 338, which is a website that takes all the polls, the latest trends, and makes projections by circumscription, and also on a scale from Canada. So you can, with your address, find your circumscription, go see who is first, second, third, is it tight or not tight? If, for example, you are in a circumscription where I say anything, but the Liberal Party is sure to pass like a bullet, and that voting for the second party doesn't change much, then maybe it's better to say,

I'm going to vote for the party that responds more to my values. And if it doesn't have a huge impact on the result, it has an impact on the party as such. Because obviously, the higher the result, the more relevant it becomes on the chessboard, the more the media will cover it. There are also money issues in all of this. We collect donations from the parties, there is public money that is poured into the parties. So it always has an impact. So I invite you to go see Quebec 125, 125 Canada 338 to see their conscription.

The other thing you can do is the electoral compass of Radio-Canada. So there are a series of questions. It will ask you if you are for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, for, especially for people like me, nationalists, it's like it's not taken into account, but it's not a big deal, it's interesting to do anyway. And that's why I invite people to go and do the electoral compass, so that it prevents you from going... It's not true that everyone is going to read the programs during all hours of their day, and we understand that, but it allows you to be in the right place. A little tour of the political parties, maybe? Yes. So, at the moment, it is the Liberal Party of Canada that is in power. It was Justin Trudeau who resigned at the beginning of the year because, you know,

we were very, very good in the polls, and when we are good in the polls, often internally, in the parties, it starts to tear apart. So he left, and there was a race to the chieftain to replace him. Generally, races to the chieftain, it doesn't happen when a party is in power. Often you will lose an election and then there will be a race to the chieftain to have a new leader. What was special was that the party was in power, the members of the Liberal Party of Canada voted for a new Prime Minister. It's Mark Carney, who we currently being talked about a lot.

And during the election campaign, it's the crisis with the United States, so he plays a big part in his role as Prime Minister. He's not just in the election campaign, he's also managing the crisis with the United States. But the situation turned upside down. For a long time, the Conservative Party was first in the polls. Pierre Poilief was in the lead. Pierre Poilieff was a big shot. He appeared as someone more responsible than Justin Trudeau in a context where the economy was not going well.

So people saw Pierre Poilieff as someone who was going to put order in all of this. Then we change Justin Trudeau for the Liberals for Mike Hunney. Mike Hunney is a very economical person who is more serious than Justin Trudeau who has a vast experience that is very relevant in the current context. And Pierre Poilève, we see, has reduced it. And Mark Coney has put the Liberal Party back in the position in the polls. It's a real situation because after 10 years of Liberal government, often we're going to have a change.

People at some point want to change. Well, maybe he's going to be able to get a fourth mandate right away, which really doesn is not often. So, what the Liberal Party proposes, it's a party that is more of a left-wing center. So, it depends on the times and the bosses, it can move a little. But the Trudeau years were very left-wing, with an alliance with the NPD, which is the other party that is even more left-wing. The NPD's boss is Jagmeet Singh, who was at Tout le Monde en part on Sunday for those who watch the TV. But his alliance with the...

Yes, last fall, but there was time to do a lot of politics in that alliance. The dental care I was talking about earlier, it's a promise of the NPD, which in the framework of the alliance, has finally become a real program. So we have a liberal government that has governed very very left-wing, that put a lot of rights to LGBT rights for sale. Justine Trudeau was really someone who was showing off like an ally, who was going to be proud, etc.

More woke movements. So when we talk about these ideas of, for example, inclusion, EDI, all the question about the debates on gender diversity, the Liberal Party of Canada was really on the side of the allies, but it was much, much more in the front. Now that it's less Kearney, we're less on that. That doesn't mean they're necessarily going to change their actions, their measures, but what Mr. Kearish puts forward is less that. It's more that I am someone of finance, someone of seriousness who will manage the crisis with the United States. So he didn't take part. He says there are values aligned with just a little bit of water, but that it's not his focus. It's not his focus and it's not the issues that people are most concerned about at the moment.

And when he became prime minister, he had to nominate a new Council of Ministers, so he chose these different ministers for his cabinet. And he didn't nominate ministers responsible for the female condition, official languages, and the defense of rights of minorities, especially LGBT. So that was a bit of a surprise, because we were wondering, well, let's see, there are no minister who takes care of that. Does that demonstrate an insensitivity of Mark Carney? So the question remains open. Honestly, I don't have the answer.

We don't know him very well, but it's a little weird. No, I think he just doesn't want to get wet and say, that's not the problem at the moment, but he'll take care of it later. That's what he's saying. I find it worrying because the rights of minorities, well, the status quo makes sure that, in my opinion, the risk of retreat is always there. You know, you just have to never give up, it seems. And it's the same for women's rights, by the way. To have equality, it seems that you have to always work and never let go.

And with what's happening in the United States, well, there's concern and we feel it. In particular, at the moment, Donald Trump is erasing everything that is inclusion, all that is gender diversity. He has put out in the entire government network all those who were responsible for inclusion and diversity.

On all governmental sites, they erased the words gay, lesbian, black. It's like a cleaning that's happening in the United States. So there are concerns here. We wonder if it could cause a contagion. And then it brings me to the Conservative Party. The Conservative Party is less active on the defense of rights of minorities, LGBTQ women. But at the same time, we are lucky in Canada because there is a certain consensus. That is to say that there are no parties at the moment who are fighting to make rights recede,

for example, cancel gay marriage. Pierre Poiliev, who is a bit too much, when he was younger, he was against gay marriage. He had voted at the time against gay marriage. He said he had evolved. Besides, you also have to know that Pierre Poiliev, his father himself is gay. He was adopted. Let's see. Yes, absolutely. So he talks about it a lot. In fact, his father was a French-speaking Canadian from the west, a French-Asian, and he was homosexual, it's pretty well known.

Which he was against, basically. Well, the logic of these people is to say, I don't have a problem with you existing, but marriage is between a man and a woman. That's always been the discourse against gay marriage, often linked to religious practices. You shouldn't cry. Anti-abortion is also often linked to religious beliefs. But he said he evolved on the question. That's the first thing.

On abortion, Mr. Poiliev says he's pro-choice, so he won't get involved in that. On the other hand, you should know that a good part of his deputies, elected in the Canadian West, are pro-life. By the way, we should say pro-life, I have to get used to it, but we say anti-choice. And these deputies have the right to submit petitions, motions, and bill projects that aim to limit access to abortion. And we go through all kinds of really hypocritical paths that aims to give rights to a fetus. And the problem with that is that even if it's not the majority of these deputies,

and even if they say, I'm not going to have the right to abortion taken back, the people who are anti-choice are much more motivated than the people who are pro-choice. I'm pro-choice, I think every woman should choose. I think that the fact of carrying life is a huge burden for women. If we don't have control over that, then equality doesn't exist. But the anti-choice, they are the fight of their lives. They save babies. And it's religious. So they are ten times more motivated than a pro-choice who says,

well, it's okay, women can choose, but I don't spend all my days working. It's not necessarily my focus every moment. So these people are at risk. They really saved a baby, a child. And they go through doors on the side to get there. For example, I don't think anyone likes to think about an abortion in the third trimester, late abortions. I don't cheat either. I think we should try to avoid it as much as possible.

I think nobody likes it. Nobody likes it. I go out on the street and say yes to abortions in the third trimester. It won't happen. We don't like it. However, sometimes, rarely, it can happen. But these deputies and these people who work in pressure groups, they will put that a lot of pressure. You are for that, you, that we have babies who are all formed in the belly of their mothers. And that's the message. And obviously, people are like, well, it's true that I'm not really comfortable and all that.

But if we start that, where does it stop? It's that you come to give yourself the idea that it's a person who has rights, that is inside another person who has rights, and you make the rights of the being that is inside the other being. So necessarily, the mother does not have control over her life if we start to control her body. These are decisions that are made by doctors, by ethics committees in hospitals,

by men, often indeed, less and less nowadays, because there are more and more women in the health committees in hospitals, by men, often, indeed, less and less, because there are more and more women in the health sector. But that said, we tried to keep politics completely outside of all of this as much as possible, because when we put this forward, there are people who will say, yes, it's true that I'm not comfortable with late-annual abortions. There is also a bill that was passed a few years ago by a conservative deputy that aimed at, and this is even more sneaky, that aimed at, if you attack a pregnant woman, it is an aggravating element that she is pregnant with because you attack fetuses too.

So you say, it's true, it's not nice to attack pregnant women, and it's serious. But wait, if it's an aggravating factor, does that mean that we're making a legal person again? We're making a victim. So we legally open the door to make abortion access and abortion rights go back. You asked me that question. You said, do you think it's more serious? Well, not more serious, but like, a pregnant woman, we're always more empathetic. We say, in addition, being pregnant, you know, someone who has a point guard, being pregnant,

we're always more... we'd say empathetic. Emotively, we'll feel like being called, but legally, you know, I'm not a lawyer, you neither, I think. We don't think about that, the kind of precedent that it could create and how it could affect, finally affect the right to abortion of women. So, all this to say, for our little tour of federal political parties, the Conservatives are not actively working to get rights back. But this element has always scared the Quebec electorate a little.

In Quebec, there is still a consensus that is bigger than in the rest of Canada, in the West Canadian, on abortion rights. The Conservative Party has never really managed to get a lot of support in Quebec, especially because of that. A few years ago, there was an election where there was a debate among the leaders. The leader of the Conservative Party at the time was Andrew Scheer, and he was an anti-choice. And it was one of the first questions in the debate the host asked about abortion. And he said to me, it's over.

People in Quebec don't like it when you want to attack abortion. And I'll tell you, I change from the federal and I'll come back to Quebec for a moment. We also have a conservative party in Quebec that is not represented at the National Assembly, whose leader is Éric Duhaime. Éric Duhaime, yes, his party is a conservative party, but he doesn't attack the rights of gays or women. He is himself gay. In fact, the head of the conservative party in Quebec is himself gay. So, you know, in Quebec, we see that we are very progressive on these issues, even if sometimes we have the impression that there are debates on gender diversity that are not going well, that are polarizing, but it's the same elsewhere in the world. You shouldn't think that we are late compared to others.

We haven't really talked about the Popular Party and the NPD. Just quickly, I would be curious what we... I'm going to talk about the Popular the Popular Party, which is not represented, which has no deputies at the moment. The leader is Maxime Bernier. He is an old conservative, very, very populist, more right-wing than his party. And he wants to limit abortion. He said it, third trimester, no abortion.

It's in his platform, he puts it forward. When Pierre Poliev became leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, he has a little bit away, Maxime Bernier, because Pierre Poliev is more of a populist too. So he's taking up a little bit of that space right now, without the ideas of Maxime Bernier, which are more extreme. So it's not a party that really has a chance of winning in Quebec or Canada at this election. Maybe one of the deputies knows, we'll keep an eye on that. The NPD is not doing very well. The NPD, what do you mean?

Yes, the new Democratic Party. It's a party that has never... There was a wave of popularity in Quebec, but it was really a mess of history, because it's a party that was born in the west of Canada. And when Jack Layton, the head of the NPD, there was a wave of love at one point, and in 2011, the Quebecers voted for the NPD's leader, was elected, there was a wave of love. In 2011, the Quebecers voted for many NPD deputies.

After that, it didn't last long. The party on the left, which had an alliance with Justin Trudeau's Liberal Party in recent years, was able to implement some electoral promises even if they had not won the government. It's as if Justin Trudeau's use of power was the NPD that brought it, not the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party has changed its leader and it's as if we were starting anew, but Jack Metting, he carries a bit of this use of power and he really fell into the polls. When we look at the last polls, he will end up with a handful of MPs maximum. He has three weeks in the countryside. We'll see.

Do people not like him in the polls? In fact, it's that at the moment we have big deficits. We spent without counting on the side of the Justin Trudeau government, especially because we put the place the NPD proposals. The cost of living has increased, the cost of houses has increased, we lack housing, we have a housing crisis. And it's as if we had found a culprit, it was this Trudeau alliance with the NPD. Trudeau is no longer there, so it really all fell on the back of the NPD, finally.

Why would someone still vote for the NPD? Well, with the arrival of Mark Carney, at the head of the Liberal Party, who did not name the Minister of the Feminine Condition, who did not name the Minister in charge of the Defense of Minorities, L'Enfant Officiel, etc., well, there could be people who say, well, I think it's too much to the right and too much to the center for me, I'm going down on the NPD.

But all of this is cyclical. Now, it's not going well, but after right for me, I'm going down on the NPD. But all this is cyclical. Now, it's not going well, but after a few years, for example, if the liberals won the election, the parties do that, generally. At some point, we like that of the conservatives who tell us, I'm going to put dollars in the house, and at some point we say, we are tired of budget cuts, and rights, minorities who are affected, and then suddenly, there is a movement on the other side. That's a bit of political alternance. So the NPD, in a few years, could finally

regain the affection of the electorate. We interrupt the podcast to talk to you about Oxio, the independent internet provider with whom it clicks. With Oxio, it's fair and sustainable prices all year round. There is no price increase at Oxio. The price for which you sign at the start is the one that will stay. There is no endless negotiation, there is no period of dishonest promotion, there is no discount that expires.

You can feel safe knowing that your monthly bill will stay the same every month. So you can sleep peacefully on your ears with OXIO. And you have a service, it's 100% Canadian. Which is very important right now, especially. Yes, it's also great fun because the service is 7 days is 7 days out of 7, 8 am to 10 pm. So, we, well, OXIO, it's very long and it's transparent. So, everything is underlined, where is it going? If there is money for advertising, there is money for employees, there is money for your internet.

Everything, everything, everything is super well indicated on their website and the Cl's going to be super nice, very fast, nice. If you want to try, you have Oxio for one month for free with the code O-X-I. No, no, not with the code SEXORAL. S-E-X-O-X-SEXORAL with the... on the website oxio.ca. So we love them a lot, not for nothing. They are like us, even if sometimes we struggle in our words. They love us the same. So right now, even the people on the left are like, there are some who are like, ah well, we are happy that someone else took the place in the Liberals to bring back order without us voting for conservatives. Exactly. It's like, Markonaughey can embody a compromise

between responsibilities, but not conservatives, who scare us with their abortion stories. Pierre-Paul Léves also has a particular personality. He's a very negative fighter. He's very aggressive. It's done. Who is it? Who?

Pierre-Paul Léves. It's done. He excludes the... The room. Who is this? Who is this? Who is this? Who is this? Who is this? Who is this? Who is this? Who is this? Who is this? Who is this? Who is this?

Who is this? Who is this? Who is this? Who is this? Who is this? Who is this? Who is this? Who is this?

Who is this? Who is this? Who is this? Who is this? Who is this? Who is this? Who is this? Who is this? Who is this? Who is this? So that's the style of Pierre Poiliev that can be depleted. And right now, more... In Trump? Well, that's it. In all comparisons with Trump right now, people are allergic.

And it's really hard for Pierre Poiliev to get rid of it. Even if I don't think it's an equivalent at all, right now, it's not what people want. And you know, in front of a Mr. Carney who has a long-term CV, a Pierre Poiliev who has been a deputy for his entire life, people think he's a bit short-tempered at the moment. There's a little difficulty appearing as an adult in the room. People are looking for someone who reassures them,

who says, I'm going to take care of it, gang, it's going to be okay, we're going to get through the storm. That's what we call the question of the ballot. We always wonder at each election, what is going to drive people's vote. And we feel that's the question right now. And there are a lot of other things that are going through the radar because of that. We want to talk about the Bloc. Bloc, ok.

Libéraux, let's say it's him who is one of the two. So we are... Left-centre, responsible. If we want to prevent Conservatives, Libéraux is a good choice. Yes, because the two parties that have a chance at the moment to form the government are Conservatives and Libéraux. The Quebec Bloc only presents candidates in Quebec. It's a party that aims to defend the interests of Quebec within the Canadian Federation. The leader is Yves-François Blanchet, who has been the leader for a while now,

with about 35 deputies in the last term. It's not going very well for the bloc at the moment, especially because we're not talking a lot about Quebec at the moment, we're talking about the United States. So there's a real really more on Canada. People have a rise in Canadian patriotism. I'm an independent person, and even at this time, sometimes, when there's the Canadian national anthem,

I sing it in my living room. So it gives you an idea of how we're not too much in the nationalist in Quebec right now. So the Bloc has a little more difficulty positioning itself. The Bloc is a strong proposition at the moment. It's the defense of Quebec agriculture. That may seem far for people, but in Quebec, we have a model of agriculture that is controlled and that is more focused on family farms.

Mr. Trump wants to break that. He wants it to be the complete opening of our market. And just to summarize a little, what that means is that competing against big American industrial farms would really equal changing our agriculture model. So the bloc really took a clear position on this, saying that in our negotiations with the United States, we must not touch agriculture, we must not put that on the table. Propositions also for seniors. Last year, in their work, they wanted to get more money for seniors. Because, I was talking about inflation earlier and cost of living. Imagine when you don't work anymore and you only count on your retirement. You don't really have the possibility to find a second job.

Sometimes we can try to organize ourselves, but seniors are very, very vulnerable to the cost of living because they are taken with mensualities that remain the same until the end of their lives. They need to be protected. They need to be protected. And again, I tell you, yesterday all the political parties proposed things for the elderly. It's important and we all agree with that. But it's so much more politically paying to do that than to make proposals for the

young people, because they're going to vote in the next years. And there's a lot of anxiety at the moment, so they're going to go to the ballot box, to put their little papers. So it's important, but if young people don't do it, no one's going to propose anything to you, because it's not politically profitable. Oh well, tabarnak. But the song...

Let's say, Libéraux. In my head, I just hear the song Libére nous des Libéraux. Yes, Libére nous. Ah, but that's impressive. Because for me, it's negative. Yes, well, that's normal. And anyway, you can't complain to everyone.

But the song Libére nous des Libéraux is the Quebec Libéraux. So it's not the federal Liberals. And there's a Liberal Party in Quebec, one in Canada, and they're quite different. The Liberal Party of Canada is more on the left than the Liberal Party of Quebec. Oh yeah? I didn't know that. It's not an equivalent. When Dominique Anglade, who was the head of the Liberal Party of Quebec,

made a turn more on the left, precisely. And she lost her election. But why aren't they coherent? It's weird, it's confusing. It's not a side-by-side. Provincial parties are not necessarily like a franchise from the mayor's house in Ottawa. It's not like that it works. And you see, for example, in other provinces,

the dynamic will often be between a Liberal Party, a Conservative Party, and the NPD, and sometimes the Participatory Party. In Quebec, our parties at the National Assembly are Liberal, PQ, CAC. We have completely different parties in other provinces. You'll have to come back to the provincial elections, we'll have questions. With pleasure. We talked a little bit about what the parties offer as opinions historically on abortion. But I'm curious, I'll name them and if there are things to add. So what the parties offer as opinions on abortion. So the traditionally-favorable liberals at the choice. It's sure that the federal, they are responsible for the criminal code of the great law.

And in the provinces, it's health. And abortion is considered as a health care. So you really have to look at both, you know, to have an idea of how much we have access to abortion. Because it can be allowed, and finally there is no clinic. It has been the case for a long time, in the Isle of Prince Edward, in particular. It's allowed.

But let's say you're a 15-year-old girl who falls pregnant in the Isle of Prince Edward, and you don't want your parents to know, it's complicated because maybe you have to be made to abort in another province. But the Liberals are favorable. NPD also, the Québécois bloc, has always been a fervent advocate of abortion and often uses abortion as a way of scaring people compared to the Conservatives.

The Conservatives, as I was saying, it's not always clear. There have been leaders who were pro-life, there have been leaders who were pro-choice, but there is always a party of deputies who are anti-choice. In the last race to the leadership, there is one of the candidates whose name is currently being omitted, Leslie Lewis, who is a fervent anti-choice who was presenting to become a leader, but she was beaten. Pierre Polyèvres, I know he says he is not anti-choice, but he doesn't support hidden projects? What he says, and it was the same with Stéphane, who was Prime Minister for several years,

is that he has his own opinion, but he lets his deputies... I understand. He doesn't force his deputies to take a party line. So if you're a deputy of the Conservative Party Conservative Party wants to put a bill in your face, and if there are motions or votes on issues of access to abortion, right to abortion, he lets his deputies vote however they want. So, for example, in the Liberal Party, if you are a deputy of the Liberal Party, you always vote... the party line is pro-choice,

and if you can't vote against your... You have to vote with the rest of your colleagues. So, it's always a bit blurry, this question. And it's the game of political opponents of conservatives, because you say, look, he's trying, he's trying to get women's rights back. And that doesn't work very well in Quebec. He's putting people against, so he says, after that he's going to wash his hands,

he's going to say, now it's my little gentlemen. It's not me. But at the same time, if the Conservative Party said it's over, you all have to be pro-choice, probably the party would be in two anyway. So it's like they found a way to manage their excites. It's too vague to my taste. Yeah, it's vague.

Ok, and what do the parties offer as opinions historically on parental leave? So, parental leave, when we come across parental leave here in Quebec, it's really managed by the government of Quebec. So, in the federal, we're going to be more on family loans. We receive federal loans from children. You receive checks through the post office. Sometimes, you don't know what that check is, it's fun. Sometimes, you didn't budget it. Sometimes, they take it away from you afterwards. Sometimes, they come and get it from you afterwards. We recalculated it.

And you owe them so much money. Yes, it can happen. Justin Trudeau had greatly increased his family loans. He had merged several aid to different families, and they made a new Canadian child rent. With this measure, they made studies, and it would have resulted in 600,000 children from the poverty line. It really had a huge impact. We realize that Pierre Poilier may be a little bit cut off.

Conservatives are generally less generous, they are generally less spending. They prefer to make incitatives at work, but at the same time they don't want to cut everything because they want the ladies to have children. That's very conservative too. Yes, because women have a biological autonomy. Yes, that's what we need to talk about. Yes, yes, the political law. So the values of the family conservator, we would like the ladies to have more children, etc.

A few days ago, Pierre Poiliev was talking about access to property. He was saying that young families who are old enough to procreate, are not able to buy a house. And when you have the money to buy a house, well, finally, your children either are made or you have spent your turn because you wanted to have a house with a court to have your children. And he said, basically, young couple 30 years old, including the biological clock, they are not able to buy a house.

And then it made a lot of people, especially women, get a little greasy, who were like, why are you talking about biological The average price of houses in Toronto is $1.2 million. In Quebec, it's expensive. In the rest of Quebec, we're still able to buy houses in the 30s. In Gaspésie, it's still going well. Yes, but salaries are lower too. It's still the same dynamic. But it's true that when Pierre-Paul Léves says,

what I would like as Canada, it's super, it's not a cutting, but it's that young families are able to buy a nice house to raise their families in a nice safe neighborhood. Because the conservatives talk a lot about public security too. They put a lot of that forward, the law and the order, very conservative, classic values. That's right. But it can resonate with young people,

because it's true that you look at the state of the economy, you look at what you do as income, how much it costs to do the grocery shopping, how much... Now, vehicles are going to cost even more with what's going on with Trump, who made tariffs on cars, the cost of houses. And you say, well, my parents were able to buy a house,

and even my grandparents, they just had a salary, and they had a super and a beautiful house. They sold it ten times the price when they had time to leave for a year. There is a feeling of injustice. Conservatives are good at playing on this element. When it's been ten years that the Liberals are in power, they try to say that they have measures, but why didn't you do it in the last ten years? So, that's it.

But Pierre Poilier's biological clock, Jack Metting, the head of the NPD, answered... What happened, if you just want to... Well, basically, he says that he wanted to make policies so that families whose biological clock was ticking could buy a house before being infertile. And Jack Middysing, the head of the NPD, said,

I don't think there's any woman who wants Pierre Poiliev to talk about their body and their biological clock, which created the general hilarity. Because Pierre Poiliev, let's say, it's a particular style, and when he talks about our body, it can create a weird feeling. If you compare it with anything Trump said, it sounds just as normal. Yeah, by comparison. By comparison. We understand each other well.

And on the LGBTQ side, in the United States, our agenda, Google, there's no more FRT, there's no more international day, we've been through all of that. Is there any in all the parties presently, are there any in this, in this conservatory? Yes, I guess, the conservatory is also... Yes, honestly, it's not comparable. And that's why I say that we're lucky in Quebec and Canada, because I think that globally, we're more progressive than in the US. Earlier I was talking about religion, there's always a link with religion, but in the US it's much stronger than in Canada.

So we're lucky, but we have to stay vigilant. The big debate right now is about gender diversity. There are people who worry about gay marriage, I think that my friends who are in a homosexual couple, they don't have to be attacked in the street, they can live their lives, it's going relatively well, there are acquis. But gender diversity, it bothers. Especially the older generations.

It's like for them, they look at it and say, my God, civilization is collapsing. What they've known is that there are men, there are women, and they see transgender people as a disease. I receive a lot of comments on social media because I'm a strong ally of the community. Last week, I received a trans woman on my podcast. It wasn't specific to that. We talked about economics because you're an entrepreneur.

And I posted a TikTok, first comment, here is a mental illness, talking about a trans woman. These kinds of comments that people receive. So the debates currently around trans people, it's for example the presence of trans women in sports. So, like, last Olympics, a boxer an Algerian boxer, who has male chromosomes, but she defines herself as a woman, she has feminine characteristics, but it's not clear. Oh, it's not clear, everyone is in the picture? Yeah, but the worst thing is that not all the time. She got a lot of attention who have been hitting on women of all kinds. But at some point, the winner of a fight, it's a scandal.

Her opponent said, I'm being hit on by a man. It created a debate and people who are very resistant to all this took it and put it out front. They said, you see, there will be no more sports in which women will be able to compete. There will be men who will enter all of this, and in the end, we erase women. So that's the ambiant discourse. After that, there's the question of schools. So we teach gender diversity in schools,

and there are people who are shocked by it, who say that we shouldn't talk about it with primary-age children. So that's a debate too, and political parties sometimes take positions about that, and it's not questions that are settled. After that, you have the whole question of transitions. So at what age, for example, we find that it is correct that a child who considers, who wants to change sex, finally, at what age is it correct to start hormonal therapy

and surgeries? And obviously, experts keep repeating in the public space that surgeries are for minors. You know, maybe we can find a case somewhere and put it out there like the world to scare people, but it's not really something that's done. But that's really what people are looking for. At the federal campaign level, we're not talking about that much right now, but I can tell you that the Prime Minister of Alberta, Danielle Smith, she filed a bill to ban gender transitions, gender transition surgeries, among children. And...

In any case, you're banned. But it's political. Yes, yes. You know, we're... Well, the surgeons, you know, it was already... It wasn't done, but it's not forbidden in a law, so she was happy with her base. It's settled. It's settled.

After that, trans people in sports will occupy debates in the next few years. The rules are not clear in all sports disciplines. It's hard to say where to put the line. If you exclude trans people, it's an exclusion. It's not correct. But if anyone, I'm giving an extreme example. In the United States, for example, studies are very expensive, university studies. People will bet a lot on sport to get scholarships. But if I give a completely agricultural example that right-wing people will often use, I am a guy, I am 16 years old, I am not at school, but I am really in shape, so I will say that I am a girl from now on,

and my name is not Josh, my name is Megan, and Megan will go swimming, she will hook up all the girls, she will take all the scholarships, she will advance all the scholarships, and she will take a place at the university that would be returned to a woman. What do we do with that? I'm not telling you that it happens every week, but it's kind of this kind of debate that's taking place on the political scene. And the non-generated toilets, which I didn't tell you about. There have been debates at the National Assembly in recent years about schools that made non-generated toilets.

It raises the passions. There are a lot of people who defend young girls when they have the rules. They go to the toilet, and there are guys who are in the toilets, and it can make them uncomfortable. So that was a big debate. It was so easy to manage. Just make individual toilets and we'll move on to another topic. That's what I was saying.

I think these toilets were... There was no blackout. There was no black rice. It was just closed toilets. So basically, they didn't name it. Basically, it's just closed toilets in a room. The debate is if, for example, you enter a room where there are small cabins, and then anyone can go, and you, let's say, as a woman, you're not comfortable with trans people in your toilet,

or men, if anyone can ever enter, well, you don't even have a place to go or feel good. But just make toilets for everyone, individually. And it's settled, basically. But when you go to the dependent, you have a door, you open your door, and they're not gendered. So you can be anything and do what you want to do, and it doesn't bother anyone. But I think there were some schools where it was complicated to just do individual toilets because... It's black magic. I agree with what you say. My daughter is there and she sees Francis pissing and he took out his penis in the same. You don't help.

You don't help. That's more it. I see it, I visualize it. But logically, if it's all closed toilets, Crème, it's like when we see a dependent. But don't underestimate how debates raise passions. In the United States, I had a friend who was at my podcast last week and she said that with her blonde hair, she won't be in the United States in the next few years. She said, if I go to the bathroom, I can get arrested by the police if someone is imported by my presence.

Oh, wow! That's crazy. And in the anthropologist, there are two sexes in the United States from now on. Could it make a contagion effect here, to un-complex people who are already homophobic or transphobic? I have the impression that it already does. All groups, of course, are even more. Exactly, all groups of defense.

And in fact, people themselves say that they feel that there is a gain, really of animosity, homophobia and transphobia at the moment. And misogyny. And racism. It still does not decline in the proposals of the political parties, which is a good thing, but I think we have to stay extremely vigilant. In any case, on social networks, in the freedom of people to feel the freedom to say everything they want to say in the comments section,

that's what we feel in Neste. Yes, they are not embarrassed to say these things. And what encourages me is when I see all the comments below of people who disapprove. I still say hope for humanity, but that's it. So it's not really the main focus in the federal electoral campaign, at the same time, the fact that we don't talk about it, for me, it's always a bit of a step back because we have to be so vigilant about women's rights and minority rights. Exactly. I would like you to explain to us how LGBTQ plus issues are interrelated to feminist issues? That's a really interesting question and of great complexity.

In fact, women are not a minority. We have been treated as a minority for centuries, but we are 50% of the population. And it makes us not a group that's all the same. There are all sorts of movements within feminism at the base. The LGBT community is a group that is a little more restricted. Sometimes at that time, there are interests that are a little more concentrated, a little clearer. So, I already see a difference.

But of course, the fight for inclusion, for me, is good for everyone. And the worst part is that it's good for the majority, it's good for the white man too. Just the question of parity. In politics, we try to put pressure on the parties so that there are as many women as there are men, deputies, ministers, etc. There are groups of women who want it to be in a law, that you are obliged to have parity. So it's 40-60. It can be 40 men, 60 women or the opposite, it doesn't matter, but that you are in the parity zone. And there are men who are opposed to that. In fact, there are women who are opposed to that too, saying that it should just be competence, it shouldn't be about the person's sex. In short, it's a debate.

Except that there is an argument that makes me laugh positively. It's that, in fact, there are women who say that parity should also be put in place because it could be the opposite one day. In certain fields of work now, especially in medicine at the university, when women started to arrive, women are better at school than boys. School is less suitable for boys. And we are more And we are more

And we are more And we are more And we are more And we are more And we are more And we are more And we are more And we are more And we are more And we are more And we are more to go get the heart more easily without killing it. Well, that's it. So, in the end, it can be the opposite too. That is to say that there are men sometimes who could find themselves disadvantaged,

that we don't try to have a parity on both sides. So, that's it. Not necessarily. Yeah, well, listen. And for me, the questions of equality and inclusion, it's good for everyone. You shouldn't see it as, well, if I give an additional right to this minority, it takes away something from me.

I see it much more as an addition. And it's not that hard to make room for everyone. On the other hand, it shouldn't become a tyranny of the minority. You have to find compromises where everyone feels that they have a place. But I think it's really possible. And for that, I think that feminism and LGBTQ issues are joining together because, basically, that's what we want. We want everyone to have a place in our society. That doesn't mean that we will always agree.

I see women who are feminists, but who are very, very shocked by all the stories of gender diversity. I can think of some chroniclers that we often see in the public space, who are afraid that by giving rights to trans, queer and all the letters that they are afraid of and that they don't understand exactly, it having a uterus. Because, for example, you have a clinic and you take care of women. For example, gynecology or maybe you do abortions, whatever. The one of pregnancy, it will be generally women, but it can be trans people. So to be inclusive, more and more we started to say women or people with uterus. Because maybe someone is in transition and has the appearance of a man but still has his uterus. We don't know. There are all kinds of cases.

Well, there are people, and especially feminists, who find that we use the expression too much, people with uterus, and that we erase women from the public space. expression, personne ayant un utérus, pis qu'on efface les femmes de l'espace public. Ouais ben, t'sais si on en a parlé un peu avant d'être en ondes là, mais l'intersexualité du féminisme est aussi importante dans le sens que on représente pas juste les femmes blanches, on représente aussi les femmes noires, les femmes trans pis de vouloir l'égalité des femmes, c'est de la vouloir pour toutes les femmes, t'sais. Black women, trans women. And to want equality for women is the desire for all women. And there's someone who said that homophobia came a lot from misogyny, because it's internalized from the hate of the feminine, from the hate of everything that is...

Everything that is not a virile, masculine man. He's scared, he's disturbed. The man who is more feminine. The homosexual man is more feminine. He has a more feminine voice, so... The masculine woman is still a woman. Yes, and lesbians are two women, we exclude men. There's always something that comes around.

But two lesbians are pigs, you know? It depends on what. Some are more popular than others. But that's it, in feminism, there are also different movements. You shouldn't think that... In fact, there are big debates. You were talking about intersexuality. There's a whole wave of feminists that don't fit at all

in this movement. So it's not what we call a monolithic block. That is to say, everyone is the same in the movement and thinks the same thing. On the contrary, there are debates that have been tearing the feminist movement for several years. We are too woke. Yeah, that's it. It's too woke. But you know, people with a vagina, we also say it for people with a penis.

It's like a little bit of... Let's say, I sell products for pleasure. I say, this is for people with a penis, for people with a vagina. I think it's a good compromise. Again, it's like non-generated toilets. I say, make all for people with a penis, for people with a vagina. I think the good compromise, once again, it's like non-generated toilets, I say, make all the individual toilets to be correct, well, we just have to say both. You know, it's up to you. It's up to you. Or no one has a uterus or no one has a vagina.

It's settled. Check. We've all settled today. Listen to us, just listen to us. We've all settled. I imagine it costs more to make a lot of individual toilets. Yeah, but you know, it costs more expensive to do individual toilet. Yes, but it's more expensive for people to feel good. And that on one side or the other, people feel comfortable. And I think it's really worth it. And you know, these debates, it hurts a lot of people.

I realize that. You know, young trans people, it's among the most vulnerable people in our society. In terms of mental health, d'intimidation. T'sais, quand il y a des débats pis il y a des politiciens dans les corridors de l'Assemblée nationale qui se mettent à parler de toi pis ta réalité pis à décider, ils ont jamais rencontré un jeune trans dans leur vie, mais tout à coup il y a une opinion là-dessus. Comment c'est reçu par ces personnes-là? Les parents aussi des jeunes trans?

T'sais, moi, j'ai pas cet enjeu-là chez moi, mais t'sais, I don't have that issue with myself, but just when your child comes home saying, I was a victim of intimidation. I really want to take my child out of school, buy a farm, and not let my child eat vegetables. 100%. We would take their place. But imagine when a trans child is being harassed, and you know it on Monday morning, you send your child to the school,

you're going to wear it. Damn, it must be tough. And then you see the police on TV talking about it, they never know it. It must be so, so painful. So for me, these solutions, even if it costs more to make gendered toilets, if we can avoid debates that really hurt a lot of people... It's so much more pleasant when you want to poop in a toilet. Anyway, who likes that? The toilet swear words where you have a veil, people wash their hands and see you sitting on the toilet. Nobody likes that.

You do that and then you throw a little fart on purpose, it's super embarrassing. Yeah, nobody likes that. How do you make feminists understand the importance of the challenges for those who only see the capitalist, capitalist sides of elections? We really have a campaign that talks about economics, and very, very few women. Honestly, I'm going to be a little pessimistic. I don't think this campaign is electoral, if we're really going to be on it. But I'm really pessimistic about the campaign, but I'm optimist in general. It always comes back. There will be an event at some point, and then the balance will turn the other way.

I consider myself a feminist, but my approach in life compared to all this is always to do it from a mobilization point of view and try to interest people. And people who are activists and who are very aggressive and who judge others' opinions a lot, for me it's not very effective to convince. So my approach is always to ask questions, to also welcome others' opinions, and then try to advance their opinions move forward little by little. I think that sometimes people think that by giving a slap in the face to someone, the person will listen to you afterwards, but it doesn't work. So for me, the good approach is to not give up, to keep talking about these issues

and try to make the link with people's lives. And feminist issues, guys, don't jump in front of them. You have to interest them. I'll tell you a story that happened at the National Assembly when I was there. There was a new deputy who came out, a girl who filed a complaint for sexual assault. It's been a few years. And all the girls, girls look at each other, we know who it is. We know it. They harassed us all. We know it right away.

And then I start to receive messages from journalists or politicians, guys, who are like, huh, who is it? And I was like, it's crazy how they are in their bubble sometimes and they don't see it. Or you know when you have discussions with guys, friends, family, and everyone starts to open up, in the whole MeToo era, we started talking about it, and there are a lot of guys who realized that all the girls around me were either harassed or assaulted. And there was a realization. It seems like they don't see it, naturally. But it doesn't concern them.

They're all like, oh yeah, that's why. What did you do recently? When my uncle is with your friends and a guy is joking about my name, do you say something or do you say shit? Does it interest you? I think the answer is unfortunately often no. And politics remains very masculine. My followers on social media are 75-80% of men.

Oh yeah. Politics scares women more. It seems that they are less interested in them at the base. We may not like conflict. I post hypotheses and obviously we are all a little different. But traditionally, it's less attractive to women. It must be said that politics was made by men for men for 10,000 years. It's a bit normal. It's been 70 years that women have been doing politics.

It's not much in the history of humanity. But we really feel it. So the work of interested people in feminine issues is always a slope that is very, very steep. That's why we should never give up. You know, earlier you said that men... You know, that they don't really lose rights, you know, it's a plus. But still, you know, I imagine being a white man, that I have everything I want and that everything is in my favor

for years, they still lose what the other gangs have, because it's less of their privilege. So it's sure that I imagine being a man. It doesn't interest me because I know I'm good. I'm very comfortable. So it's sure that there is also a kind of, well, you have to face a discomfort if you accept that others join you. Yes, and there is no one who naturally wants to be less comfortable. It's a bit the same thing with the environment, it makes me think. Yeah, and there's no one who naturally wants to be less comfortable. It's a bit like the environment, it makes me think.

People are all like, I'm for this environment. Okay, you should change your habits. It makes me feel less all of a sudden. But you're absolutely right. And I'm a mom of two boys. Sometimes I worry too, not because I don't want people to have equality, but I don't want people to throw the baby with the water. My sons are guys who don't have access to scholarships or special programs to give more space to minorities. They always get really good grades because school is difficult in their case and it's not necessarily natural for them.

Of course, sometimes your reflex is to say, well, be careful, we shouldn't forget our boys, but we all agree on that. But for me, it's not to stop our efforts with minorities and our efforts for equality between men and women, it's more to ask ourselves, well, okay, what can we do in parallel to ensure that guys feel good too? It's a bit of a shock. I think of my friend Elisabeth Lemain who was like,

don't make me cry guys, don't make us cry. I have a bit of pity in the sense. I look at men who commit sexual violence, men who fall into male movements. It's not that I have sympathy for them. It's that I tell myself, how can we do to prevent them from getting there? Are there things that we don't do correctly in the school system, in our way of raising boys? I would rather there were no guys like that.

I think it's a lot to making us responsible for our issues. It's the sum of the mental burden. Exactly. It's like, OK, so your problem is our fault too. Well, you're a jerk. Honestly, I understand. But with everything that happened with the masculinist movements, there was a debate on whether we should invite them or not, for example on TV or in podcasts, etc. to give them a stand.

And I really don't like those discourses, but I was thinking, yes, we have to talk. And it's for sure that we could just be angry and spit on them, it would do us good. Absolutely. And after that, well, finally, they will be even more convinced in their position. And I'm not sure we've made progress as a society.

It's hard not to get angry sometimes. You were talking earlier about how it's true that we don't want to listen to a slap in the face. It's 100% true. But sometimes, to control this kind of conviction, this rage that you have, because it's frustrating what can happen. Sometimes it's hard not to just slap. And the message doesn't always pass, that's it. It's that I'm very, like you, in the sense that I've always been for you.

I have three brothers, I'm very much for equality. I never, you know, I'm not going to be in the attack in my speech. I just want us to be good and everyone to be equal, and in peace. That's my discourse. But my discourse, and the discourse of... Sometimes, the discourse of the discourse, it can do something.

Yes, it may not be the best, but it may have a bigger impact. Because my speech, there's not many people who understand it. Peace, love you. You know, you understand? I find it very interesting what you're saying. Because it's true that if everyone was nice, and we never hurt anyone, and we understand everyone speaking the same way, and we say, I understand your opinion, well, it would never move.

So I think we need both. I think for example of civil rights in the United States, the rights of blacks in the 60s, where it moved a lot, it's true that there was no movement where at one point there were more violent movements. I'm not really fond of violence, but it was a lot of fighting.

There were blacks who went to restaurants reserved for white people, who sat at the counter, who were arrested by the police. You know, sometimes you have to disturb, I agree. But there are people who will better respond to the dialogue, and there are people who will change the dialogue. Okay, that's the question that had to be answered a couple of times before understanding its meaning. Why is the discourse of secularism of the Quebecois bloc not seen as an anti-feminist act? It mainly affects the mainly feminine jobs and never speaks of the rights of queer and trans people. Okay. I understand the question because it often comes back. For me, laicite is a subject that fascinates me and I really like like to debate with people who are against it.

Can you explain what secularism is? So, secularism is to separate religion from government. At first, that's it. In the 20s, 30s, 40s in Quebec, next to the Prime Minister, there was a priest. It was very connected. Catholic religion was everywhere. It was religious communities that managed schools, that managed hospitals. There were priests who went to our grandmothers' houses and said,

« It would be nice to have another child, Mrs. Chauze. » And contraception is not good, it's not good to try not to have children and things like that. So religion was very, very present. The generation of my mother, me and my mother, is very tolerant, she accepts everyone, but she really has an allergy to religion. She won't say it, she wants to be inclusive with everyone. But you feel that this generation and the older generation have been a little traumatized by their childhood. They have been to schools with religious people, they have been beaten beaten sometimes, there was all kinds of sexual assault. In short, there are many many things that happened around the church.

In Quebec, at one point, we really got out of the government religion, we got out of the religion of schools. We have crosses on schools, but it's no longer taught by the religious. And this issue of secularism has grown more and more. I mean, we consider, and I'm talking in general, it's like a vision of living together, that you have the right to have the religion you want, and to practice your religion. There are people who will stop you from practicing your religion, but you can't impose your religion on others.

So it can be imposed in several ways on others, for example, by the accommodations that are asked. A few years ago, there were debates on reasonable or unreasonable accommodations. For example, parents who practice a religion and don't want their daughters to take physical education classes with boys. So now it's going against the educational program. It's going against gender equality. It's not part of our custom here to separate boys and girls for certain activities, or to say that you're a girl and you can't do that kind of activity, etc. So there are fundamental values like gender equality and LGBTQ rights,

which are considered inalienable. So your religion won't have the upper hand on that. You can't say, because you have a religion, I don't want to be arrested by a policewoman, or I don't want to be treated. Health care is a little different, there are often disagreements, we don't talk about it too much. But we consider that here it is like that,

it is equal to men and women, the rest of the community has the right to live and practice their work, and it's not your religion that will change that. So there is this vision. After that, there are governments that have proposed to legislate against the use of religious signs. Because does the fact that someone wears a religious sign, in fact, impose in some way his religion, he imposes it in the public space? So a few years ago, the PQ had forward a project called the Charter of Values. We wanted to, in particular, ban the use of religious signs in public functions. So, the officials, we said the government is secular, so you cannot wear religious signs.

Since you cannot wear a chandelier from the Liberal Party or the Quebec Party to the office, because you are politically neutral, we also demand religious neutrality. It caused a lot of debate. It's not a bill that has passed. The PQ has lost elections. The CAC, a few years later, comes up with another project of secularism. We leave the officials aside, but we say we will ban religious signs from people in positions of authority. So, police, judges, and we also include teachers. That's a lot of debate.

So, when you're facing a judge, you don't want to feel that his religion has an impact on his judgment, basically. So, we say to ourselves, if he's not able to remove his religious sign to go to work, it must still take place in his life, his religion. Will his judgment be altered by his religion? So, that was kind of the spirit of the bill.

And teachers, we considered that if you teach, your religion should not at all be included in the account line with what teaching you give to our children. This is a bill that exists, bill 21, which has been adopted. There is currently a new bill that has been passed. We want to go even further

because last fall there was a scandal in some secondary schools in Montreal where there were teachers who were Muslim and who did not teach certain things for religious issues, especially sexuality, science, who said to girls, you can't play soccer, who prevented intervening women from coming to class. In short, all kinds of things that really had no kind of good blood. Prayers too, the question of prayer in schools. You can't really ask yourself to pray in schools. So, the CAQ has put forward a new bill to frame all this, in which in particular, educators in the police service would now also have the right to wear religious signs. I want to tell you that this, in which, in particular, the educators in the service of the police also now would not have the right to wear religious signs. I want to tell you that I, in the service of the police, my child, there will be no more educators because they are mostly Muslims.

So that really makes a debate. So that's the question, debates on secularism in Quebec, and everyone has their position a little bit on that. But it makes a relatively consensus. These are ideas that are popular in Quebec. Not everyone agrees with that. But generally, when we do surveys, you will see that 70-75% of people are favorable

to everything I just told you. Now, when you take feminism and you put secularism, there are all kinds of weird things happen. Because there is a paradox. There is an intersectional feminist movement that says, for example, to prohibit religious signs in a woman. It comes to affect in a disproportionate way Muslim women, because they wear the flower.

But at the same time, the law applies to everyone. It's just that your religion makes sure that you wear a sign that says it's not our fault. In fact, it's your religion that forces you to wear something. That's what I'm saying. The men with the turban or it implies that too. Yes. And you know, I don't have the right to...

Anyway, I'm not at all practicing or anything, but I couldn't, if I was a judge, I would come up with a big cross in my neck. It's just that it's less in our practices. There are religions that put more of that forward. Jesus tattoos. Exactly. I asked the government when they put the new bill because all the staff in schools now have no religious sign.

So if a guy with a tattoo, with a Virgin Mary, it all works, it doesn't work, they don't know yet. It can pose all kinds of questions. But when you're a feminist, let's say, I'm going to ask you both the question. You go to the safari park on a good Saturday morning, and then you play in the pool with your children, and then you see a lady wearing an integral veil, so a burka or a niqab, covered face.

She can't swim on the pool side. Her husband is almost in a spin-off, with the kids in the pool, he's having fun. You look at that, what do you think is the feminist position to have in relation to that? Do you say, well, we don't know anything. Or do you say, « Well, it doesn't sound good. » Or do you say, « Oh no, it's her choice. » « And I'm not going to tell women how to dress. » « I want to respect her choice. »

I don't have an answer to that. I don't know what you think. It's difficult. It's like... when it comes... It's case by case's like... When it comes... It's case by case, I want to say, when it comes to the choice of the woman. Because there are so many women who wear the veil for themselves. That for them, it's a sign of empowerment.

That it's like that, they feel that... That they detach themselves from men. That it's like that who take back their power. There are many women who do that. But it's certain that when you bring me to this question, the relationship to the man who dominates, you know what it is, the woman submits to the man like the man submits to God,

you know, that's for sure what we're going to talk about a little less. But I understand that it's really, it's a terrain that can be blurry. And the line can be hard to put. It's when we know if it's really your choice or not. So, you know, a lot of feminists see hijabs, niqabs, burqas as signs of submission of women. And at the same time, other feminists who say, it's not up to us to tell women how to dress. You don't find it weird to say,

get dressed. It's really something that makes debate, and it's not that obvious. When you see, for example, a girl's gang who go to college, for example, from the Maghreb region, some have the hijab, some don't. When I look at a gang like that,

I think, yes, it's a choice. Some people wear it, some don't. But the line is hard to trace. There's no law project right now that wants to ban women in any religious school in public space. But in some places, we consider that, first of all, it's the face of the discoverer. Recently, there was a phenomenon in some schools in Montreal where there were students who put on a hijab and a mask, like COVID. But every day. So what did the teacher do? Because he said, well, students should have their faces covered.

But at the same time, it tells me that they are happy every day, what do you want? I can't do anything about it. So in the bill presented by Bernard-Drinville, it's the face discovered in class. But I was like, ok, if you have the harem, can you do it? Or how will it work? It's really complicated. It's really complicated, but I think you can be a feminist and for secularism. The question of teachers, for example, it worked for me a lot. At first, I wasn't sure it was a good idea because I thought,

you know, those women, I like them to work. You know, what will happen to a teacher who has a job, she will just go home and not do her job? Do my children, you know, I want them to see diversity. I don't want there to be a tainted education of religion at all. And I don't want there to be people who say, women and men, it doesn't matter. And you don't want people to say that women and men are not equal. It's clear. But you know, that my child goes to the care home and that the educators

help him, my son is like me, it's his religion. It's really cool. They watch the children who take their food, but they bring it outside. So, it has no impact on me. I really appreciate their, as long as we respect the fundamental values that are ours. That's why secularism, if you consider that it's just not wanting religion to have an impact on the laws and rules that are put in place, but that it's still the person who has the right to express, to visually represent what they believe in, I don't know, I'm... There's no simple answer to all this. I'm touched. Yeah. Okay, well, thank you, because this morning I was reading this question, I read it six times. I didn't understand.

Yeah, I understood it because I was asked to do it often. In both cases, there will be... You know, there's negative in both, so it's really... I don't know how they're going to... It's really hard to draw a line, I think. Yeah. Because that's what you're saying. There are people, there are women who wear it by submission, for real. And there are women who don't. So how do you know? But if you say, OK, you're not allowed to wear a niqab, for example, in public space, what do you think will happen?

Do you think they'll say, oh well, honey, take off your niqab? No, it's just going to get out of her house. There was a debate in France a few years ago about the bathing shirts, which we called burkini. It was forbidden in I think it was in several municipalities, but I'm not sure of the exact legislation, but there was a big debate on it.

And I was thinking, I want them to bathe. If you say, you're too far from putting on burkini, they won't put a little bikini on your neck. It's really weird to say, get dressed less. It's really weird. And they'll just take a shower. And a burkini, basically, looks like a wetsuit. You're interested in wetsuits?

There's a connection. That's it. And that's it, one problem will bring the other problem. So there's no... You really have to go with persimony and make sure that the goal is that religion is not imposed on other people. But when it just erases all forms of religion, I find that unrealistic. There's another debate on banning prayer in public places. I don't like that. Seeing people praying in public places bothers me.

But banning that, you know, maybe in the park there's a person praying. You see people praying in front of the cathedral, and there are religious songs outside, you're going to forbid that. At some point, if they don't block the street and don't come to talk to my kids and tell them about the evangelists, it doesn't bother me. That's for sure. Prayer, sadistic maybe? But... It's really... We try to avoid it.

I could forbid that, but otherwise... It's okay. According to you, which part of the feminist issues really matter? The NPD, so. Yes. the feminist issues. The NPD, so. Yes, and I was curious, I went to see the NPD's candidate page, and I have to say that

on the diversity side, they win the gold medal. On the parity side, they also win the gold medal. They have the most female candidates, but not only female. I saw clearly people of the gender diversity as well, Indigenous people, people of cultural diversity. I give them the gold medal.

The silver medal, at least in the case of gender parity, is the Quebec Bloc, which has more female candidates. The liberal bronze medal, and the medal of... Plon, the conservators. And participation. I didn't check. We'll check. But my guess would be that there must be a lot of women.

Well, yes. To check. It's a woman's business, the plants. Your plants will live longer with the women, that's for sure. Not at home. At the level of the rights of oppressed groups, women, immigrants, disabled people, is there a big difference in values between the Liberal Party and the NPD? I think that now, yes.

It wasn't necessarily the case with Justin Trudeau as the leader of the Liberal Party. It was very close and I think it contributed a lot to the fact that the Liberals were looking for the NPD vote, because there was a Liberal Party that was very, very strong on these issues. With the arrival of Mark Carney as the leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, again, no ministers were entitled to these files. And we're talking about sexual and gender diversity, but there are also disabled people. There are no ministers who take care of that anymore, even though it existed under Justin Trudeau.

So I have the impression that they lost some feathers on that side. That's a good banker, McCormick. He will manage your wallet well, but he is not there to manage these offers. The rest of life, in fact, he doesn't care. He takes care of the money. I compare it a little. I work as a consultant. Sometimes I have clients for public relations and crisis management. It makes me think a little bit about...

Let's say you're an organization. Let's say you have a crisis management. You said something serious and it's scandalous. Then you fall into crisis management. Sometimes you hire a crisis management consultant or a public relations firm. And when you start working as a crisis management expert, people don't want you to adhere to all the values of the organization. They don't care what you've done before. And maybe you haven't always given your services to the widow and the orphan.

Maybe you've worked for oil companies, maybe you've worked for companies that do tax evasion. But basically, you do you hire him? Who does he get you out of the shell? You don't care about the rest. But I think that's what Mike Arne is all about. And that's how he managed to get into the right place. People are like, I don't care about the rest at the moment. Just settle my problem with Trump.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, that's it. It's just going to bring other problems. Well, yeah, it's going to come back. The problems have disappeared a bit, like by magic, because we don't talk about them anymore. But the alliance between the NPD and the Liberals, is it completely broken? Is it back? For now, completely broken.

So it's two completely independent political parties. It made more sense for Justin Trudeau, who allied with Jagmeet Singh, than for Mike Carney, who with a Jagmeet Singh. I have the impression that they will have less affinity, especially since Mark Carney is trying to differentiate himself from his predecessor Justin Trudeau. The other thing is that it's mathematical. In the end, Justin didn't say one morning, I don't like Jagmeet, we're going to make an alliance. In the end, there weren't enough deps to have the majority in the room. So if you don't make an alliance, you lose your votes.

So we had to find MPs who would vote from their side, so we made a deal with the NPD. If the NPD, I'm making a scenario catastrophe, has three MPs, and we have a minority government, so we need to make an alliance, well, maybe the Liberal Party could go back to the Quebec Bloc. It's not often the Bloc has already made alliances with conservatives. Oh yeah. But it can also contribute to softening certain policies.

For example, if we have a minoritarian conservative party that makes compromises with opposition parties, sometimes it makes sure that you can't pass all the laws you want, because you have to agree with other political parties. So that's the ideal. Obviously, it's always the most possible, unless it's really your favorite party. But at the moment, and that's another really interesting dilemma, is that, for example, I don't know a lot about Mike Carney. I don't want to give him a blank check necessarily.

I don't want conservatives to have a majority government because there are things on the environment. So it would be good for the minority government, but at the same time, we are in crisis with the United States. So that means that every time you want to make a decision, you have to have opposition parties, you tell your friends, can you do that? You're not sure in terms of efficiency that it's the right thing to do. So it's going to be up to voters to decide. Since we're in crisis management right now. When you're in crisis management, do you want to have five spokespersons? No.

You want to have one spokesperson. Very interesting. Thank you for this analogy. I know it's been an hour and a half since we last met, but I need us to address all the questions we have because I think it's important. So I'd like to see it with you. We can go ahead and ask questions in raffle. OK, short answer. Yes, OK. It's still broad questions, not long questions. I'm going to try, I'll do my best.

OK. What explains the lack of representation of women in politics? Short answer, 10,000 years of male domination, it's been 70 years since there were women in politics, it's going to take a little longer. I also feel less naturally attracted to conflict among women. I think that partisanship and political jude, where we get into, There are a lot of women that it can kill. But politics is not just that. It's just that we show a lot of that in the media. But there are all kinds of beautiful things that happen in collaboration. You can have an impact that is exceptional. I think of law projects, politicians like Véronique Yvon,

who put the law on medical help to die in Quebec, which was made in a spirit of collaboration. It can't always be all about collaboration, because there are conflicts in society, which has been done in a spirit of collaboration. It can't always be collaboration because there are conflicts in society, so there are conflicts in politics, but it's possible. So, the message I'm sending to women is that if you want politics to look like you, we don't really have any other choice than to go. And things have evolved a lot, especially on the questions of conciliation between family and work. It's not perfect. It's not perfect.

There are still a lot of ways to go. But we see more women who have children, depending on the babies, at the National Assembly, at the Chamber of Communes, mothers who have a baby, guys who go on maternity leave, who say, I'm going to leave for five months on maternity leave. Gabrielle Lando-Dubois did that this year. So it moves, things evolve. I'm really optimistic about that.

There's a question related to that. How can the announcement of a pregnancy affect the career of a woman in politics? It's better than it was, but it's still complicated. For example, I think of Geneviève Guilbeault, the Vice Prime Minister of Quebec. I'm going into provincial politics a little bit. She did her electoral campaign to get elected pregnant. Imagine that there are political opponents who were doing door-to-door, and who were telling people,

she's going to let you down, she's going to go into maternity leave, don't vote for a pregnant woman. I've heard that before. It's for sure that taking a maternity leave when you're a minister, it's still more complicated than when you work in a public relations agency or in a company that manufactures boxes. It's not the same reality. And it's certainly more complicated for women than for men. Men go on maternity leave for three months, everyone applauds, oh wow, extraordinary! But if a minister leaves for nine months, it won't work. So they have to make all sorts of arrangements. I see it badly.

It will come to your career, unfortunately, I think. But often, the cases I saw that worked, there was a partner who was really very involved and who adapted his life a little. So it all ended up turning around the political career. So it's not easy for everyone. In fact, it's a challenge anyway, in the careers of all women, to find the right moment, to not miss professional opportunities,

and then to reconcile your work with your family life. But it's done. Ok, so it's not forbidden, it's not like, « Hey no, you can't… » It's like, « I'm not like, hey no, you can't... It's not ideal. If you really want your kid, we'll make it up, but... We're really seeing more and more, with all kinds of different cases, there's a minister at the federal level, liberal, called Karina Gould, who has a child, depending on who she is, and all that, and it really looked like it was going to be okay, but I don't know what her family situation is. Maybe she had her dad who took her to jail.

Maybe her mother lives in the same house and she takes care of her all the time. We don't know, but if you're a single mother, no family, and you're in politics, and you're going to have a child, I wish you good luck. That's it. The last question I would ask you here, and then we would take a little 15 minutes on our Patreon. Are you okay? Yes. Okay. I know we've already talked about it, but I think it's important to dig into it.

Is it better to vote strategically to keep our rights or to vote with our hearts? I can't answer one or the other. Honestly, it depends on where you live, and it depends on the political context. If, for example, at some point there is really a stake in the rights in this example, you will say, in my count, because we have an indirect political system,

we vote for a deputy, and it's the party that has the most deputies, that the leader will give the prime minister and then choose his ministers. So, you know, our impact is really, really indirect. So I really invite you to look at both, so make the electoral compass to know your values, but also look at, in each circumstance, what would be your first choice, your second choice, your third choice? And if it's your fourth choice that you're at risk of winning, then it's possible that you say, yes, it would be better if it was my second choice than my fourth choice. So the strategy can come into play.

It's for sure that I never invite people to vote completely their values, to be only strategic. It's like a compromise between them. We'll put in the description of the podcast the tools, the electoral option, to see where your circumscription is. I'll do it, for sure. Do you have other resources or tools for us that we could use for people who have...

Because the podcast is really know, for people who have... Because the podcast is really so short, for people who... I could maybe invite people to follow some little accounts. If you want to take the time to think, we'll just say that in the description of this video, there will be resources and tools. And I'm not going to do a mega self-plug, but it's for sure that if people follow me on Instagram and TikTok,

I often make small capsules. And there's Lambert in Rennesville who also makes capsules on TikTok. And he's younger, he's more of a generation on TikTok. So we could also put his account, it could be interesting. People follow him, he makes small capsules of vulgarization. It's really cool that it addresses a young audience. That would be it, I think that's it. Thank you very much.

And congratulations for what you're doing, representing everyone. And I liked that you said, you know, to represent the woman well, that you're a feminist, but I still have to do that, and it's true. Otherwise, the guys will all put me against you. Unfortunately, our mental charge continues on that side. We can't just sit at home and think that these issues will be protected and our rights will be protected. We have to make the little effort. But now we feel politically strong.

Gang! Yes! Thank you Antoinette, you were extraordinary. Thank you Absoil. Thank you so much for the truth. Bravo. Well, we have to go. Joannie is going to join us later.

We have to go. We have one more question. Joannie is going to join us later. We have to go. Is it true that the Conservatives want to withdraw the Canadian rent to families? The answer is yes and no. The Conservatives are a little less generous on rent. They have announced certain measures for access to property. In fact, they want to cancel the TPS on the purchase of a house. But they will look for it. Under one million.

Under one million. But on the other hand, they have to get the money somewhere. So yes, it was said that they were going to do a cleaning in the family allocations. But I wouldn't be too worried if they cut all the allocations, because traditionally, the previous conservative governments didn't remove all the grants. Okay. Since the last few years, how much have you seen an influence from the United States in the federal policies of Canada? Until recently, we felt it and we saw it. And we shouldn't underestimate the interference of other countries in our elections. There are countries that want to influence our elections here.

We talked about China in recent years. There have been pressures that have been made internally so that certain pro-China candidates win the elections. We know that the Russians are very strong on social media to create all kinds of accounts, bots that will push ideas that are the most polarizing. In fact, what they want to do is to weaken our democracy and our social fabric. So basically, I would say they're doing shit to weaken us. And the United States also has an influence on us. During the COVID, there was the blockade in Ottawa, the truckers, the truck convoy.

There were a lot of Americans involved in this, financing coming from the United States. So the very conservative movement in the United States is pushing for these groups to be reinforced in Canada too. So there is an influence, but at the same time, since the beginning of the election campaign, in all comparison with Donald Trump, voters don't like that. So on the contrary, I feel that even Pierre Poilé, he must justify and say, no, I'm not a mini Trump, no, I don't like him, he doesn't like me, we don't like each other, we're not friends. So does that mean that it will reduce the influence of the United States here? On the question of inclusion, I think that the entire anti-trans and anti-gay discourse in the United States can come to un-complex the people who have these ideas here.

I know that it is. It's really deplorable to see. So the last question is, is there really a link between Poilèvres and Trois? Do we say Poilèvres? Yes, Poilèvres. Poilèvres. Like the English say. I like Poilèvres. It looks like Poilèvres annoys me.

I think you can say Poilèvres. Okay. It would work. It's like it's going fast. It would work. Is there a link between the two? No. No. It's a conservative, Poilier.

So ideologically, he is closer to the Republican Party than an NPD. But it's extremely different. We have a party that doesn't propose to step back on certain rights.

You won't see a lot of conservatives go to the parade in a gay pride. It's not really their style, but there's really a lot of differences between the two. Trump said, he's a bit of a Canadian campaign fan, he said he would prefer the liberal to win. Yes, but except that... I'm asking the question,

is it because he really likes Mark Carney or is it because he's trying to do the opposite of psychology? He says everyone is going to be in Canada anyway, so I want to give the Conservatives a better chance by saying I like Mark Carney. Oh, that's interesting. Donald Trump admires Vladimir Putin, the Russian president. And Vladimir Putin, during the American presidential election, said he would prefer Kamala Harris to win, with a little smile on her face. So I thought, you know, he's his kind of guy, a little copied. That's it, he does the same thing.

I didn't know all that. We don't know what's in his head. You have a nose for my throat, that's what... I'm not the one who said it. Aiyai. Well, I'm going to take off. It's a Mongolian style, that's what... Not me who said it. Aieeoe. Well, I'm getting off. That's it, it's because... You know, I want to have all the beautiful ideas from the left.

You know, NPD talks to me, you know. But it's like... The movement... I have misery to position myself. It's normal. As I said earlier, it's a lot of compromise. I worked for political parties. Sometimes there are politicians, I was like, wow. It didn't even try to defend them, but you make compromises, you say there are like 70% of the ideas that suit me.

There is this 30% that interests me less, in, and there's this idea that disgusts me, but you know, I have to make the compromise. And the more you're young, and you have less experience in public affairs and politics, well, at first you're like, I don't want to make those compromises. And it's really as you get to know this necessity. And I really see it in the people around me. They really like to get involved in groups, environmental causes, women's causes, etc. Because they have less compromise to make, basically.

There are more people gathering around an idea. And it's less confronting than having to go to a big political party where you may have to support ideas that you don't like. Yeah. We're in a special climate, but anyway, thank you so much for being... And you tell me what your electoral compass gave you. I've already done it, and I think I take them in screenshots. And you were more like Jane Pédery?

Hey, I don't even remember. It's like, quickly in the car. I'm going to get you out of this. Oh yes. Oh no. You're more to the right than you thought? I'm more to the left than I thought. My first was Parti Vert. Good, well, like Joannie.

Parti Vert, second NPD, third Liberal, after Bloc Québécois, after Conservateur, after the Popular Party. Yeah, it doesn't surprise me too much. If you like the Green Party, generally, you're not going to like the Popular Party of Maxime Bernier. No, that's it. It's like a bit of opposites. Well, that's it. So I would say that I'm going to go see my conscription and then I'll make my decision. As a consequence, well, Have a good campaign, everyone. You too. Thank you very much.

Welcome to the official Patreon sexual orale platform. I'm here! I'm here! I'm here! I'm here! I'm here! What can you expect from our Patreon platform? It's live shows that we've never shown to anyone,

that you'll be able to see. You'll be able to ask questions for guests who come. You'll see one bonus podcast per month. Sometimes it's live shows, sometimes it's just us here who jam. After the podcasts, after the podcasts we're going to have recorded, we'll go directly on Patreon to film after shows. Announcements in advance, tickets, access to live shows. No matter what you choose, like whatever, we thank you in advance.

It's a big difference for Sexual Horal. It's something that grows, it's our baby. We're proud, we're happy. Yeah, and that's it. Thank you so much! A production by Studio SF